Does a defendant need a defence

[stinkyhinksy]

We have made a claim in the county court (Multitrac). Representing myself.
we bought some land which was in bankruptcy which had occupiers on it.
Before buying the land we were told by the trustees and the LPA (acting for lloyds)
That no one had paid rent on the land for 4 years. therefore no one could have a tenancy or license,because they had no security of tenure.
The defendants First defence was that a Mr ### from the trustees told him to pay the bankrupt farmer. This was completely denied by the trustees & there was no Mr ###. We informed the defendants solicitor what we had found out and this had to be accepted by the defendant as he had made up a fictitious character..
Upon receiving our information we received a letter from the defendants solicitor stating his client was confused and it was in fact a Mr #### from the LPA that had told him to pay the bankrupt farmer. Unfortunately for the defendeant Mr### from the LPA denied this by letter straight away. Meaning the defendant has put in two False defences.
However the defendant has not filed his second defence as yet with the court with a statement of truth. We have not diclosed to the other side because we fear the defendant will use our evidence to once again change his defence. His solicitor has also now said we should not exchange witness statements, i want his witness statement for the same reasons. where do i stand........
,

[bednobs]

this seems very complicated and i would be advised by legal counsel if i were you. You have not made it clear who you are even suing or why.

[stinkyhinksy]

suing an occupier. He stayed on the land for 10 months claiming to be a tenant, refused to provide any documentation, then left a year later 2010 without paying any money or signing a deed of surrender as asked on numerous occasions by my solicitor. In his defence he claims he is allowed to stay here until the end of march 2011, so we do not as yet have legal possesion of the land as he is defending the case. In total without legal fees i am out of pocket by £6500 just by him occupying the land. In my opinion illegally.
the land was with the trustees for 5 years until it was sold to me. Neither the trustees or the lpa received any rent, both have provided evidence to say they do not recognise he has any tenancy over the land that this man is claiming.
this mans solicitor has now informed me he is changing his defence but has not applied to the court or informed them, although i have forwarded his letter to the judge.
both the trustees and the lpa are fully behind me, in truth the man has no defence.
i have been granted summary judgement.